Talk:9nine

YouTube links in article

I meant to say, external links are not normally included in the body of an article per WP:EL. Featured list videography/discography pages such as Justin Timberlake videography don't have links like that. Random86 (talk) 19:37, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

• Some other articles do. (Not just Korean and Japanese ones. At least I saw some that had.) Please leave them be. I can't create articles for all of their singles to put the links there. --Moscow Connection (talk) 21:49, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

• Moscow Connection, Random86 is correct on the links, regardless of what other articles have done. See WP:OSE. If you'll point out the specific sites that have these links, I'll be happy to go delete the links there too. GregJackP Boomer! 04:22, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

• Right. And those singles shouldn't even have articles anyway. In an article that has only some statistical information, there is no decent argument to have this much content--esp. if so much of it consists of BLP violations and utter trivia. Seriously, MoscowConnection, we don't do colors. Drmies (talk) 05:12, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

• Why would you do this? Killing all my desire to contribute anything to Wikipedia? I'm sorry, I can't attend to this discussion right now cause I'm not really "back" to a normal editing and endlessly discussing mode, I only came here to the English Wikipedia to create some amount of articles from my list of pages to create and I just want to finish with it as fast as possible.
  I'm not talking about you, but why are there so many editors who have fun on Wikipedia socializing and playing some sort of game in which they repress other editors? Youtube links and many other kinds of external links are allowed. But it's probably a fun game to go around Wikipedia randomly deleting stuff, it makes one feel important. (Not talking about anyone here.) (As for the colors, I will make the table more unconspicuous. But not right now, sorry. And by the way, future encyclopedias will have multimedia capabilities and will link to external storage. Wikipedia will sooner or later become a more entertaining site, now it's just ugly.) --Moscow Connection (talk) 11:22, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

• You couldn't have disqualified yourself better if you tried. Drmies (talk) 01:35, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

• (Explanation).
  I should better explain. I only returned to the English Wikipedia to create some pages I wanted to create for quite some time (some of them for years). (I mean I was more or less here on Wiki all the time, with some breaks, but I preferred not to visit the English section cause I was creating hundreds of pages in another language. But now, since I'm more or less finished with everything, I returned.)
  (And then I might go back to the Russian Wiki cause I have around 30–50 more pages partly prepared for them (or "for us", cause now I have more edits there). But it's summer already, so I guess I won't.)
  Therefore...
  User:Drmies,
  Could you please be so kind and go a bit easier on me? I haven't touched this particular article for a couple of years, and I can't fix it right now for the lack of time. I know it looks terrible. (It has Japanese-Wikipedia-style tables cause probably the people who made them were Japanese.) --Moscow Connection (talk) 12:13, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
• I see you've already "fixed it" by just removing everything... What can I say... I really, really can't attend to this discussion right now... If I do, I'll never do what I planned... --Moscow Connection (talk) 12:21, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
• @Drmies: By the way, you rended the page completely unusable. Now from a point of view of a person who wants to know about 9nine, Wikipedia should be deleted from Google. Why did you remove the chart positions and the birthdates and stuff? Maybe someone like DAJF could fix it better. (I'm not asking, but I really, really can't do it right now. It would take me, like several days or weeks or years with endless discussions, etc. I only planned to come, create some pages, and go. All in several days.)
  (Really, why? If Wikipedia has no info, then no one will ever come here to edit. I can't be the only one who cares. It's too tiring.) --Moscow Connection (talk) 13:24, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

• (edit conflict)I don't think that you understand the problem. English Wikipedia has standards, rules that you should follow in creating articles. You cannot just add whatever you want, especially when it relates to people who are still alive. Your addition of Youtube links and fancruft do not meet those standards. You are welcome to edit, but if you add stuff that is against the rules, don't be surprised when it is removed. GregJackP Boomer! 13:49, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

• (edit conflict) "Fancruft" is a derogatory term that can be applied to anything the speaker doesn't care for. If someone is not a fan of New York or Moscow or Tokyo, should he come and delete the table of monthly averages? It's the same thing, you should admit it.
  Actually, I'm too kind not to point you to the article about the or one of Random86's favorite bands. He acts differently in their article. And, if he noticed, when he was deleting some info from articles of other bands while keeping his favorite article intact, I didn't say a thing. Even more, I actually said that I see that he didn't remove the data and that I was happy he didn't. Cause I actually care about every single group or artist. And not only artists, I care about everything on Wiki, I would want it to be useful and as complete as possible. I've also seen some other people at K-pop articles who put unsourced info (or use sources that don't actually say what they added) in articles they care for and act completely different on pages they don't care for. On other pages they are tough defenders of Wiki from "fancruft".) --Moscow Connection (talk) 15:00, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
• Actually, I think that Dr.K should take a closer look at the situation with K-pop stuff. And maybe he will see that it's not a simple good users / bad users situation as he may think. And if someone is friends with Drmies, it doesn't mean that the person is a good editor. I'm interested in a variety of topics, and I would put the same stuff and YouTube links everywhere. At least I'm not hypocritical.
  Okay, now I'm going away. I will probably have to prepare other pages I wanted to post to the English Wikipedia offline. Cause otherwise I will never create them. (But really, why am I even contributing to this site if people can come like this and make the site completely useless?) --Moscow Connection (talk) 15:00, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

And what did you do at Umika Kawashima [1]? Why? Is this some kind of revenge for adding the YouTube links back? (Yeas, I actually [it's 100% true] assume good faith and think that it's an invitation to add some sources, but I can't do it right now.) Okay, that will be the last time I post here today. And something happened with my browser, and my edit window is blank. I had to write it elsewhere and blindly copy-paste it somewhere at the bottom.) --Moscow Connection (talk) 13:40, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

• I can't say it any better than User:GregJackP just did. I don't know why you're turning this into some "you're all ganging up on me" kind of thing: who made those articles in this way is irrelevant to me, and I have no interest in you specifically, as a target or a Facebook friend. But if you, a longtime Wikipedia editor, start defending color for members of a girl group, then I wonder what you've been doing here all this time. As for these birth dates, we've gone over that again and again and again. Unverified BLP trivial. You want to stick some chart positions in an article somewhere, that's fine, but do it in a way that's conventional and accepted, even if boring, and with proper references to reliable sources. Drmies (talk) 14:28, 29 April 2015 (UTC)